DailyFinance.comhttp://www.dailyfinance.comDailyFinance.comhttp://o.aolcdn.com/os/df/2013/img/2-dailyfinance_logo_m.pngDailyFinance.comhttp://www.dailyfinance.comen-usCopyright 2015 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/Jet.com Willing to Spend Money to Make Money, CEO Sayshttp://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/08/02/jet-spends-money-take-on-amazon/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/08/02/jet-spends-money-take-on-amazon/http://www.dailyfinance.com/2015/08/02/jet-spends-money-take-on-amazon/#commentsFiled under: Company News, Amazon.com, Retail, Shopping, InternetShin Woong-Jae/The Washington Post via Getty ImagesEmployees of jet.com work and comics super heroes characters are displayed on the wall at Jet.com headquarters in Montclair, N.J. Jet.com team named its system after super hero characters like Batman, Superman, Iron Man and more.By Trent Gillies

Start-up e-commerce membership site Jet.com took off less than two weeks ago, but it's already flying with big ambitions.

With a $49.99 annual membership fee and free shipping for orders of more than $35, the site has Amazon Prime, warehouse clubs and online retail sites squarely in its sights. In an interview with CNBC's "On the Money," founder and CEO Marc Lore claims that shoppers get more value the more they buy.

Jet.com differs from its competition because of an algorithm that is able to adjust prices as you shop, he said.

"We built this technology that actually helps pull supply chain costs out of the system," Lore told CNBC, adding that the more you buy, the less you pay for each item.

"We built this dynamic pricing engine that actually reprices products in real time as consumers shop to reflect the true marginal cost of getting that product to you, based on knowing what's in your basket," he added.

Lore says the savings are mostly on the cost advantage of more efficient shipping.

"The more product you get into the same box," he said, "and the closer the buyer is to the inventory, lowers shipping costs."

Loss leader

"This is really a scale game. And we put out there that our goal is to get to $20 billion [in annual sales] in five years, at which point we'll be at scale." -Marc Lore, CEO of Jet.com

According to data from e-commerce intelligence firm Profitero, Jet.com's prices were on average 8 percent lower than Amazon's and 6 percent below Walmart's (WMT). Profitero analyzed 16,000 identical items across seven categories at the three retailers in its study last week.

Lore told CNBC that Profitero's analysis was based on the "starting price," and that consumer savings will be even greater over time -- perhaps as much as 10 to 15 percent less.

"As you shop in a smarter way and build your basket, the marginal cost to ship additional product comes down so you see that in real time," he said. "The prices are coming down."

Jet.com has $225 million in investor funding. Not unlike Amazon -- which recently stunned Wall Street by posting a rare profit in its latest quarter -- Lore told CNBC he expects the company to lose "hundreds of millions" of dollars until 2020.

"This is really a scale game." Jet's CEO explained. "And we put out there that our goal is to get to $20 billion [in annual sales] in five years, at which point we'll be at scale."

In other words, Lore has no fear of red ink -- at least until he gets what he wants. "In the short term, we will incur losses until we get to scale," he said.

CNBC asked Lore about an order placed for a single toothbrush for $2.11. It was part of a larger order, but the toothbrush arrived separately in a shipment from Walmart.com, and the receipt Jet.com sent showed a total cost of $8.10. How can the company afford to absorb those kinds of losses?

"In that particular case, we're simply bridging. We're start-ups still. So it's still the early days," Lore explained. "So the fact we went out and bought it at Walmart.com, in this case, is just a temporary bridge."

Lore said the company has warehouses in New Jersey, Kansas and Nevada, and expects to increase that number. "By the next 12 months we'll have just about every everyday essential product you can imagine in the warehouses."

Lore has had success in this sector before. He was co-founder and CEO of Quidsi, the company behind Diapers.com, Soap.com and pet supply site Wag.com. He sold the company to Amazon in 2010 for $545 million, only to go head-to-head with them five years later.

Yet could history repeat? Would he contemplate selling Jet.com to Amazon.com (AMZN) or someone else?

"We're not thinking about that now," Lore said, "We think there's a really big opportunity to create a large business."

"On the Money" airs on CNBC Sundays at 7:30 p.m., or check listings for airtimes in local markets.

Americans are saving more, just not in their employer-sponsored retirement plans, according to a new analysis by retirement market researcher Hearts & Wallets.

Average annual household savings increased almost a full percentage point to 5.5 percent last year, up from 4.6 percent in 2013, based on Hearts & Wallets' annual survey of 5,500 U.S. households. (The personal savings rate this May was 5.1 percent, according to the latest release from the Federal Reserve Bank in St. Louis.) But the percentage of household savings that went into employer-sponsored retirements plans like 401(k)s fell 7 percentage points to 22 percent in 2014, and households participating in employer-sponsored plans declined to 56 percent last year from 60 percent in 2013.

Our research shows that the average saver was more focused on building an emergency fund than saving for retirement last year.

"Our research shows that the average saver was more focused on building an emergency fund than saving for retirement last year," said Laura Varas, co-founder of Hearts & Wallets. The percentage of households that said they set aside money to deal with unexpected expenses grew from 37 percent in 2013 to 45 percent in 2014.

Adopting automatic enrollment, as many companies have, can increase employee participation. But employers can also help improve participation and contribution levels in retirement plans by offering matching contributions, Varas said.

The analysis, based on 2014 data and released Tuesday, found that an employer match can double the annual retirement plan contribution among workers who said that getting the employer match was very important to them. In that group, the power of the employer match was strongest among savers earning $48,000 to $95,999: they increased their average retirement plan contribution by 2.5 times because of an employer match, according to Hearts & Wallets.

Only 10 percent of the people surveyed were eligible for a retirement plan that offered a matching employer contribution of more than 6 percent of an employee's salary, a third said their employer match was 4 to 6 percent, roughly another third said their match was 3 percent, and 24 percent said their employer offered no match.

The size of your matching contribution often depends on the size of your employer.

The average retirement plan match is 6 percent of an employee's salary among large employers, said Alison Borland, senior vice president of retirement strategy and solutions at benefits consulting firm Aon Hewitt.

"The popularity of the employer match is growing among large companies," she said. "They are more concerned about whether their employees have enough in retirement savings. Employers are more likely to increase the employer match than other benefits."

Even if the employer match is increasing, workers are still leaving money on the table. Financial Engines, an investment advisory firm, estimates that about a quarter of retirement plan participants are missing out on receiving the full company match. That translates into average loss of $1,336 a person each year or an estimated $24 billion of missed retirement savings in total.

However, the number of people contributing to their retirement plans to earn at least the match is gradually rising. Nearly three-quarters of plan participants in 2014 were saving at a level that will allow them to receive the full benefit of the employer match, according to Aon Hewitt. That was 1 percentage point higher than in 2013. And among people who are currently saving below the employer match, nearly 30 percent are enrolled in an automatic escalation program that will gradually increase their savings rates to qualify for the full employer contribution.

The employer match isn't the only way to increase the use of retirement plans. Automatically enrolling workers in these plans can also boost participation. The share of employers with more than 80 percent participation rates in defined contribution plans increased from 50 percent in 2010 to 64 percent in 2014 as the share of companies offering automatic enrollment rose from 57 percent to 68 percent, according to study by Tower Watson.

"Automatic features of retirement plans are very sticky," Borland said. "They are the best way to change plan participant behavior."

Change doesn't come easy -- particularly when you're trying to move the needle at a company that rakes in hundreds of billions in annual sales.

Still, when new CEOs took over at two of the country's largest retailers within a three-day time span last year, experts knew major changes were in store for the industry.

As Greg Foran and Brian Cornell mark their one-year anniversaries at Walmart U.S. (WMT) and Target (TGT) next month, the two are looking to continue building on the frameworks they've put in place, and set their companies up for future growth.

Although both retailers cater to a still-struggling consumer, the financials are starting to trend in their favor. Both big-box stores posted two consecutive quarters of traffic gains in the most recent periods. They've also recorded three straight quarters of same-store sales gains, following a string of flat or lower results.

Target, however, has delivered an upside surprise to Retail Metrics' quarterly revenue and earnings estimates for the past three quarters, whereas Walmart has disappointed twice on revenue and once on profit.

As a result, Target's shares have climbed 36 percent under Cornell, while Walmart's shares have dropped roughly 4 percent during Foran's tenure.

To Moody's analyst Charles O'Shea, Target's biggest success under Cornell came from one of the biggest failures in its history: Canada.

Just five months after Cornell took control, he announced that the company would incur a $500 million-plus cash cost to shutter its 133 stores there. The locations, which fell flat with Canadian consumers due to their high prices and empty shelves, weren't expected to be profitable until at least 2021.

"It's almost mind-boggling to see what happened up there," O'Shea said. "That was priority No. 1."

Closing up shop in Canada was one of a string of tough decisions Cornell has made, Johnson said. To reduce costs and speed up the decision-making process, the CEO in March said the company would cut several thousand jobs in a $2 billion savings plan. And just last month, Target parted ways with longtime merchandising chief Kathee Tesija.

"Fixing the merchandise is a big deal," Johnson said.

Part of what has traditionally separated Target from its low-price competitors was its reputation for cheap but chic items. But as other stores started a race to the bottom in the post-recession years, even the bull's-eye retailer has admitted it focused too much on the "pay less" portion of its "expect more, pay less" proposition.

There are so many fronts that you have to fight on.

Updating the stores' merchandise is at the core of one of Cornell's biggest initiatives -- prioritizing what the company refers to as its four "signature" categories: style, baby, kids and wellness. Analysts agree Target has made strides in once again differentiating merchandise, including its blockbuster limited-time collection with Palm Beach-inspired fashion house Lilly Pulitzer (OXM).

But there is still work to be done, including finding a new chief merchant.

Cornell, who comes from the consumer packaged goods industry, has listed grocery as another of his major priorities, and recently hired former PetsMart and Safeway executive Anne Dament to lead the charge.

Accelerating the food business, which together with pet supplies accounts for 21 percent of Target's sales, could deliver a significant traffic boost to the retailer, as consumers shop for food five times as often as everything else, O'Shea said.

But it's also a difficult business to get right -- particularly as Walmart zeros in on the category.

Target is also hoping its recent partnership with CVS will boost visits to its stores. Through this deal, Target last month sold its pharmacy business to CVS Health (CVS), which could provide it with millions of repeat customers.

"Target could potentially realize incremental sales as it picks up incident front-end purchases that customers used to make at [a] CVS location," Cowen & Co. analyst Oliver Chen wrote in a note to investors.

That's not to say Target is taking its foot off the gas on the Web. Although O'Shea said its online operations still lag competitors such as Walmart or Best Buy (BBY), it's improved its tablet app, and its Cartwheel savings app continues to offer shoppers value.

O'Shea said he's not sure, however, how much longer Target -- or Walmart for that matter -- can continue offering free shipping promotions in an effort to steal business from Amazon.com (AMZN).

"There are so many fronts that you have to fight on," O'Shea said.

Walmart Going Back to Basics

Turnaround at Walmart U.S. has been understandably slower. With $288 billion in annual sales, the retailer's largest unit alone pulls in twice as much revenue as the second-biggest U.S. retailer, Kroger (KR).

Though Walmart's sales and profits have failed to break out during Foran's tenure, the retailer recently reignited the minimum wage debate by boosting hourly pay for 500,000 of its U.S. workers to $9 an hour. Although experts agreed the move would dilute its profits, it should "start to bear dividends down the road," Johnson said.

"When you pay people just minimum wage or close to minimum wage, you're going to have a turnover problem," Johnson said.

Now, by incentivizing store associates to stick around longer -- and providing additional training to managers -- the stores' operations should improve. That includes everything from keeping its shelves stocked, having enough shopping carts at the front of the store, and cutting down on the long lines that have frustrated Walmart shoppers.

Improving operations in the retailer's fresh food business is particularly important, as grocery accounts for more than half of its revenues. This is something the retailer has to get right, since Target sets the category in its crosshairs.

Perhaps Walmart's biggest opportunity in this area is its small-format Neighborhood Market stores, which are located in more urban areas and skew toward grocery. These stores, which now account for more than 10 percent of the retailer's U.S. store count, offer shoppers a low-cost alternative for everyday items that they need during the week. They stand in contrast to its supercenter format, which cater to shoppers who want to stock up on bulk items.

"It's hard to argue with all those points of distribution," O'Shea said. "You take advantage of the fill-in trip and you also become a competitor to every other retailer out there."

"Greg is really focused on that."

Johnson said he would like to see Walmart further accelerate its rollout of small-format stores, though they still have some operational issues. Problems include such retail basics as having enough handcarts to accommodate for small trips, and staying in-stock on fresh foods, Johnson said.

These examples fall in line with the priorities Foran outlined at Walmart's investor meeting in April. First on the list: Improve the customer experience. As such, he acknowledged the retailer needs to do a better job getting inventory levels right and improving the flow of product to the selling floor.

Stores have also started to reduce the price on products that are nearing their expiration date, which he estimates will deliver $500 million in annual savings. And moving forward, Foran plans to improve the lighting, layout and temperature in some of its stores.

Although that doesn't mean the retailer will lose focus on savings, Johnson said Walmart can't rely on price alone to get people in the door.

Foran echoed that sentiment back in April.

"To be really frank, if we went out there and started shouting about price today, I don't think you'd get a great return on your investment," he said.

"I think customers would want to make sure that we are in stock, that the store was clean, including the toilets, that fresh was reasonably fresh and that the service from the front end was appropriate."

Denver led the gains with 10-percent year-over-year appreciation in home prices, following by San Francisco and Dallas, where prices rose 9.7 percent and 8.4 percent, respectively.

Nationally, single-family home prices have settled into an annual 4 to 5 percent pace of increase, moderating after "double-digit bubbly pattern of 2013," according to S&P/Case-Shiller.

"Over the next two years or so, the rate of home price increases is more likely to slow than to accelerate. Prices are increasing about twice as fast as inflation or wages," David M. Blitzer, managing director and chairman of the index committee at S&P Dow Jones Indices, said in a statement.
The weak link in the market remains first-time home buyers, S&P/Case-Shiller reported.

"First time buyers provide the demand and liquidity that supports trading up by current home owners. Without a boost in first timers, there is less housing market activity, fewer existing homes being put on the market, and more worry about inventory," Blitzer said.

About half of American workers are employed by a company or are part of a union that sponsors a pension or retirement plan. But that doesn't mean the 77 million U.S. workers who don't have a 401(k) or employer-sponsored retirement plan are out of luck when it comes to building a nest egg. There is no reason you can't save for retirement on your own. Here are three steps you need to take now:

Open a traditional or Roth IRA. Contribute as much as you can every month and increase your allocation every year until you reach the maximum contribution limit. Depending on your income, you can save up to $5,500 in 2015 -- up to $6.500 if you're 50 or older.

IRA contribution limits are far lower than for a regular or Roth 401(k), which allow maximum contributions of $18,000 this year or $24,000 if you're 50 or older. But you'll still get the benefits of compounded earnings growth as well as certain tax advantages. Regular IRA contributions may be tax-deductible and Roth IRAs allow you to withdraw those funds tax-free in retirement.

SEP IRA: Contribute as much as 25 percent of your net earnings from self-employment income, up to $53,000 this year.

Solo 401(k): In addition to salary deferrals of up to $18,000 (or $24,000 if you're 50 or older), a worker who is self-employed can contribute an additional 25 percent of your net earnings, up to $53,000.

SIMPLE IRA: You can put all of your net earnings from self-employment in the plan up to $12,500 in 2015, plus a "catch-up contribution" of $3,000 if you're 50 or older.

Add to retirement savings in a taxable account. Pick investments -- stocks, bonds, mutual funds and other assets -- based on your appetite for risk and when you want to retire. If you have extra money to stash in brokerage account in addition to tax-advantaged plans that can also help you build long-term growth to ensure you are able to retire on your terms.

Americans aren't spending much of the money they're saving at the pump.

Some benefit in home prices and employment have come to areas with long commutes, but effects on retail spending have been "more ambiguous," according to an analysis from Goldman Sachs economists.

While consumer spending has picked up since Q1, results for the year so far have fallen short of our expectations.

"Our view has been that the boost to real incomes from lower energy prices -- and its positive impact on consumer spending -- would offset the drag from energy-related investment, resulting in gains for US GDP growth on net," Hui Shan and Zach Pandl said in their report. "While consumer spending has picked up since Q1, results for the year so far have fallen short of our expectations."

Indeed, retail spending has been disappointing despite expectations for a rejuvenated U.S. economy boosted by the decline in oil prices. Crude tumbled 55 percent and gasoline dropped 42 percent from June 2014 to January 2015. The decline in both has abated since then, but prices at the pump are still 30 percent lower than they were a year ago, according to AAA.

In a study that looked at U.S. regions where at least 80 percent of workers commute, Goldman found uneven results: Improving labor markets and declines in mortgage delinquency, but not enough to translate to substantial retail spending gains on a national level.

The reason lies primarily in the beneficiaries: Less wealthy people likely used the savings to pay down debt and put in savings, with only the wealthy spending.

"County and ZIP code level data suggest that areas with long commute times -- which benefit disproportionally from lower gasoline prices -- have experienced a boost in their labor and housing markets relative to other locations," Shan and Pandl wrote. "We therefore see evidence that consumers are responding to cheaper gasoline, and in our view a portion of this extra spending power remains in the tank."

How much is still "in the tank" will be critical toward the arc of U.S. growth. Gross domestic product fell well short of expectations in the first quarter, contracting 0.2 percent. Economists blamed the slowdown on poor weather and the West Coast port strike, though a recent paper from the New York Federal Reserve found the latter event to have only a modest drag on growth. GDP, however, is on track for 3 percent gains in the subsequent two quarters, according to the CNBC/Moody's Analytics Current Quarter GDP Survey.

Inflation Pressures Elsewhere

That upswing may have to come without as much help as expected from consumers. The National Retail Federation cut its full-year sales growth expectations Wednesday to 3.5 percent from 4.1 percent, due to what NRF president and CEO Matthew Shay deemed "lackluster growth in our economy."

Relief at the gas pump has been offset by pressures elsewhere.

Hourly wages are growing at just 2 percent annually and real wages, accounting for inflation, actually declined 0.3 percent in June, according to the Labor Department.

Prices also have surged in several areas, most notably eggs, which rose 31 percent in June just in a month, thanks to an avian flu outbreak in chickens. Wine surged 20 percent, beer was up more than 5 percent and gasoline rose more than 2 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

In recent research, Nick Colas, chief market strategist at Convergex who keeps a lookout for consumer trends, found a strong correlation between the fall in gas prices, miles driven and employment trends. In a nutshell, he surmised that the lower prices were resulting in more driving, primarily to work.

"At the tail end of last year, most economists were dead sure that lower gasoline prices would spark a wave of incremental spending, as most periods of declining energy prices had in the past. Makes sense -- less money at the pump means more money to spend elsewhere," Colas wrote. "Except this mystery turned into something more akin to the 'Hound of the Baskervilles,' where the central clue was the absence of a barking dog. As is now painfully obvious, the American consumer took their gas savings, bypassed the mall, and just went home."

With Corporate America in the midst of huge efforts to harness the power of the millennial generation as consumers and employees, the young people being targeted so aggressively are themselves missing the financial boat, according to a top-rated financial adviser.

Millennials, loosely defined as people born in the early 1980s through the late 1990s, are an "almost a clueless generation in so many ways," John Spooner, managing director at Morgan Stanley Wealth Management, told CNBC in an interview.

Author of the book "No One Ever Told Us That: Money and Life Lessons for Young Adults," Spooner said the problem is twofold: Schools aren't teaching young people "particular solutions," and parents are trying to be "buddies with their kids," instead of teaching them to survive in the real world.

In three key takeaways from his book, the Morgan Stanley financial adviser outlines how millennials -- also known as Generation Y -- can succeed in life and in managing their own money.

1. Resist 'the entitlement gene.' First of all, Spooner told "Squawk Box" that young people need to be responsive to getting advice by resisting "the entitlement gene" mentality and devising a concrete plan for success in the next five years.

In conversations with millennials, he said a common answer is: Work for myself, "but they have no idea how that's going to take shape." Another answer he said he gets, is: "Where am I going to be in five years? I don't know where I'm going to be next week."

2. Life is all about relationships. The second theme Spooner wants to impart to young people just beginning their careers is: Life is all about relationships -- real ones, not virtual.

Don't rely on technology as your sole means of communications, he continued, seek the counsel of an older, more experienced worker. "Millennials should invite them to lunch, and buy them lunch."

3. Find your 'stake-in-life-company.' As millennials become more and more successful, they need to do a better job of understanding and managing their money, said Spooner, describing a third lesson from the book.

"As young people, I'm talking 25 to 40-plus, you should go for long-term growth of your capital, and it should include diversifying in your 401(k)," he told CNBC.

"But my concept in addition to this is find something I call your stake-in-life-company -- something you believe is going to be around for the next 20 years that you can accumulate slowly," he continued. "Every single time you get bad markets, add to it."

An author of financial nonfiction as well as novels, Spooner in his life as an investment adviser manages money for 800 families around the world with assets under management of over a billion dollars.

They paid their Obamacare fine, even though many of them apparently didn't have to.

About 7.5 million taxpayers so far have paid a penalty on their taxes for failing to have health insurance last year, as required for the first time by the Affordable Care Act. That number is well in excess of original expectations, officials said Monday.

The average penalty paid was about $200 a person, and in all $1.5 billion was collected by the Internal Revenue Service in these fines.

The Treasury Department said about 300,000 people who paid the penalty likely qualified for an exemption from having to have health coverage. There are a slew of exemptions from the Obamacare mandate based on income status or certain hardships.

The IRS will be reaching out to these taxpayers to inform them about available exemptions and note that they may benefit from amending their tax return.

"The IRS will be reaching out to these taxpayers to inform them about available exemptions and note that they may benefit from amending their tax return," said Mark Mazur, assistant Treasury secretary for tax policy, in a blog post Monday. "This outreach will also help educate taxpayers about the options they have for future years."

About 12 million people claimed one of the many exemptions from the Obamacare mandate to have coverage, officials said. This represents about 9 percent of all filers, compared to the 10 to 20 percent that it had been estimated would avail themselves of an exemption. Another 5.1 million people failed to state they had health coverage, claim an exemption, or say they had paid the fine, officials said. The IRS is now "analyzing these cases to determine their status," according to a letter officials sent Congress.

The Obama administration had expected that between 2 and 4 percent of taxpayers would be subject to the Obamacare penalty this past filing season, which would have worked out to between 2.7 million and 5.4 million people. Instead, about 6 percent of taxpayers have paid the fine.

As a result, almost exactly the same number of people who selected Obamacare plans sold through government-run marketplaces by the close of open enrollment in 2014 opted or failed to get coverage that year, and agreed to pay the tax penalty.

Accepting Coverage

The higher-than-expected number of people paying the penalty underscores the challenges the administration continues to face in getting uninsured people to willingly accept coverage even after the ACA made it easier for them to do so.

The penalty for failing to have coverage last year was the greater of $95 per adult or 1 percent of adjusted gross household income. That fine rises to the higher of $325 per adult or 2 percent of household income this year, and increases in future years.This year was the first in which the IRS was dealing with many issues related to the Affordable Care Act. As expected, about 76 percent of taxpayers -- the equivalent of about 102 million returns -- simply checked a box on their return to indicate they had health coverage throughout the year, and weren't required to do anything else to comply with the ACA.

A much smaller group of people who purchased Obamacare health plans on government exchanges, and who received a federal subsidy to help pay for their plans, were required to file forms reconciling what they received in subsidies, and what they actually should have received. The subsidies can be worth thousands of dollars a year.

Only about 10 percent of subsidized customers got the exact amount of tax credits they were due. About 40 percent were owed more in the way of subsidies when they filed their taxes, and got an average of an extra $600. About 50 percent of subsidized customers owe money back, an average of $800, officials said.

Many Unfiled Returns

The Treasury Department said that out of 4.5 million taxpayers who received a subsidy, or tax credit, only about 2.7 million had filed a tax return that was processed by the end of May.

Another 360,000 subsidized Obamacare customers had filed for an extension on their taxes.

About 710,000 people who received subsidies haven't filed a tax return, and haven't applied for an extension, as required, officials said.

The IRS is reaching out to those people, and reminding them of their responsibility to file a return. If those people don't respond, they would lose their subsidy next year.

Another 760,000 who were subsidized, and who filed a return but didn't file a form reconciling their Obamacare subsidies, are also being contacted by the IRS.

CNBC revealed last week how TaxAudit.com, an audit defense company, said none of its clients were being questioned by the IRS about their compliance with the ACA on any issue except for having received a tax credit and not filing a form reconciling that subsidy amount.

No TaxAudit.com clients who merely claimed they had coverage, who qualified for an exemption, or who had failed to check the box indicating their coverage status were being questioned by the IRS, a company executive said.

Older Americans are living longer than ever with a record high life expectancy of nearly 79, according to the latest research from the National Center for Health Statistics. Women generally live longer than men, to an average of 81. That means for many couples, at least one spouse will live into their 80s, 90s or even to beyond 100.

If that happens, you want to make sure you don't run out of money when you're 85. How can you ensure that your nest egg will last through your final years?

1. Plan for at least two or three decades in retirement. The most recent NCHS data show someone now 65 is expected to live at least 19 more years. It's likely you could live that long, or longer, if you are in good health and your parents and grandparents lived a long life.

2. Save as much as you can in your tax-advantaged retirement accounts -- 401(k)s and IRAs -- as well as taxable accounts for long-term investments. A married couple can stash away up to $36,000 in 401(k)s this year (up to $48,000 if they are 50 or older.)

Maxing out on regular or Roth IRAs will add another $11,000 to a couple's nest egg in 2015, or $13,000 if you're both 50 or older. But few Americans can save that much every year. Many are facing a retirement savings shortfall: A recent EBRI survey shows for those on the verge of retirement savings deficits can vary from about $19,000 to nearly $63,000.

3. Some financial advisers suggest buying longevity insurance, a type of deferred annuity that offers guaranteed income for life, to help supplement retirement savings later in life.

Here's how it works: You invest money upfront -- at say 55 or 65 -- in exchange for future payments. (Longevity insurance doesn't usually kick in until you're about 85.) The payout benefit is calculated at the time that you invest, usually just before or after you retire.

The size of the payout is based on how old you are when you buy the insurance. Generally, the younger you are when you buy it, the larger the annual benefit. But there is a big downside: You either use it or lose it. If you die before the benefit kicks in, the money you put in is lost.

Still, several insurers have recently launched longevity insurance contracts for 401(k)s and IRAs and some financial advisers say it may be worth investing a small part of your portfolio in a longevity annuity contract, in addition to owning stocks, bonds and other assets. It's another way to further diversity your nest egg since you may live longer than you expect.

A limited supply of listings continues to push home prices higher across the nation -- so much higher that 10 states and the District of Columbia hit new home price peaks in May. Including sales of distressed homes, prices increased 6.3 percent nationally from a year ago, according to CoreLogic (CLGX).

"Mortgage rates on 30-year fixed-rate loans remained below 4 percent through May, helping to fuel home purchase activity," said Frank Nothaft, chief economist for CoreLogic. "Our homes-for-sale listing data shows that markets with high demand and limited supply, such as San Francisco, are recording double-digit appreciation rates over the past year."

Thirty-three states are now at or within 10 percent of their price peaks, going back to January 1976, when CoreLogic began tracking. Ten states -- Alaska, Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas and Vermont -- reached new price peaks.

These new prices are likely behind a surge in the number of homeowners who think now is a good time to sell. Fifty-two percent of homeowners surveyed by Fannie Mae in June said as much, a new high for the monthly gauge, and the first time that metric surpassed 50 percent. Not surprisingly, the number of those who think it's a good time to buy a house fell to 63 percent, matching a survey low.

A complementary rise in the good-time-to-sell measure suggests that limited inventory, which is putting upward pressure on house prices, gives an increasing advantage to sellers.

The share who said they expect home rental prices to go up in the next year also rose to an all-time survey high. The expectation of higher rents is likely due to more new renter households being formed, as more people get jobs and move out on their own, either out of family or group homes.

"A complementary rise in the good-time-to-sell measure suggests that limited inventory, which is putting upward pressure on house prices, gives an increasing advantage to sellers," said Doug Duncan, Fannie Mae's chief economist. "Together, these results point to a healthier home purchase market, with more renters likely to find owning to be more cost effective than renting and more sellers likely to put their homes on the market."

Sentiment, however, is one thing; ability is another. More renters may want to become buyers because in the end it is more cost effective, but credit still stands in the way for some. Mortgage credit availability fell in June, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association, giving back the gains seen in May.

"Despite recent signs of improvement in housing markets, mortgage credit availability stalled in June," said Lynn Fisher, the association's vice president of research and economics. "Increases driven by higher availability of cash-out-refinance loans were more than offset by reduced availability of other types of loans this month, resulting in a decline in the index from May."

The biggest tightening was seen in the most popular category -- conventional loans, which are those backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That could be due in part to lenders preparing for new regulations going into effect this fall. These rules are designed to create more transparency and accountability in lending.

Macy's (M) is ending its 11-year partnership with Donald Trump, in response to uproar from Hispanic consumers who were upset with the businessman's disparaging remarks about Latinos.

"Macy's is a company that stands for diversity and inclusion," the company said in a statement Wednesday. "We welcome all customers, and respect for the dignity of all people is a cornerstone of our culture. We are disappointed and distressed by recent remarks about immigrants from Mexico."

In a separate statement, Trump said he was the one who decided to terminate the partnership, citing "the pressure being put on [Macy's] by outside sources." Trump also said that he has "never been happy about the fact that the ties and shirts are made in China."

"While selling Trump ties and shirts at Macy's is a small business in terms of dollar volume, my principles are far more important and therefore much more valuable," he said in the statement.

Trump's menswear collection, which includes ties and dress shirts, has been carried at the department store since 2004.

The partnership's end comes after more than 728,000 people signed a petition on MoveOn.org asking Macy's CEO Terry Lundgren to "dump Trump." And on Tuesday, online Latino organization Presente.org issued a statement saying it "demand Macy's take a stand against discrimination."

Following Macy's announcement, Angelo Carusone, who started MoveOn.org's petition, said the retailer has "finally made the right decision to stop investing in and supporting Donald Trump."

Arturo Carmona, executive director of Presente.org, said the organization is "thrilled to see Macy's dumping Donald Trump's toxic discrimination against Latinos."

Macy's move also follows decisions by NBC and Univision to stop airing his "Miss USA" and "Miss Universe" pageants.

Macy's has prioritized building connections with Hispanic customers, through its exclusive line with Mexican performer Thalía Sodi, and by holding Hispanic Heritage Month events in its stores.

In a landmark decision for gay rights, the Supreme Court on Friday ruled 5-4 that the Constitution gives same-sex couples the right to marry.

"In many ways we feel like it happened so fast, but the very first applications for marriage that I'm aware of were back in the 1970s, so it seems like it took a long time," said Stuart Armstrong, a certified financial planner with Centinel Financial Group who has served on the board of directors of PridePlanners, financial planners serving the LGBT community. "It's a sea change."

In terms of planning strategies, in many ways it will make our jobs easier.

The ruling gives unprecedented recognition in America to same-sex couples. And on a practical level, same-sex couples will see their financial lives dramatically simplified. No married same-sex couples will need to file two sets of tax returns, a joint return to the federal government and two separate filings to their state. And all married same-sex couples will have clarity about Social Security benefits when one partner dies as well as state estate taxes.

"In terms of planning strategies, in many ways it will make our jobs easier," said Armstrong.

The road to Friday's ruling has been long and winding, partly because each state establishes its own marriage laws. States didno' explicitly allow or ban same-sex marriage until 1973, when Maryland added a line to its Family Law Code stating that "only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid in this State."

Others followed suit, and couples sporadically contested some of the rules for many years. Then in 1996, President Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibited federal recognition of same-sex marriages.

DOMA, as that law was known, had myriad implications for same-sex couples, but one of the more frustrating involved taxes. When one spouse died in an opposite-sex marriage, the other could inherit their assets tax-free, thanks to the marital deduction -- but same-sex couples didn't have that benefit. In addition, same-sex couples had to file their federal tax returns separately, which was more cumbersome and often meant they had to pay more in taxes and accountants' fees. They also had to remember to carry their marriage license and other documents with them when they crossed state lines.

DOMA remained on the books even as various states and communities passed laws allowing either civil unions or same-sex marriages. The first legally recognized same-sex marriage took place 11 years ago, and the Supreme Court struck down DOMA exactly two years ago, on June 26, 2013, with a decision that stated, in part, that DOMA led to "deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment."

That ruling allowed same-sex couples to file joint federal tax returns, but left them having to file separately in states that didn't recognize their marriage.

It also left important uncertainties about same-sex marriage, notably whether states that didn't recognize those unions were required to recognize marriages that took place in other states, and whether states themselves have the right to ban same-sex marriage.

The case before the Court, Obergefell v. Hodges, was consolidated with several others. In the original Obergefell suit, James Obergefell, an Ohio resident, married his longtime partner John Arthur when Arthur was dying from ALS. Because Ohio doesn't recognize same-sex marriage, they flew to Maryland and were married on an airport tarmac. Obergefell sued after Arthur died and Ohio would not list him on the death certificate.

Tim Bresnahan, head of Northern Trust's national LGBT and nontraditional families practice, said the ruling will have very different implications for same-sex couples depending on their circumstances. Those already married in states that were recognizing same-sex marriage may not feel much difference, he said. Married couples in states that weren't recognizing same-sex marriage will see important benefits when it comes to estate taxes and the like. Even long term couples that do not plan to marry may see changes, he said.

It will be extremely important for couples to obtain advice from financial advisors, accountants, or lawyers, Bresnahan said, since each state has different tax and inheritance laws. For example, in Texas, which did not recognize same-sex marriage, the homestead law holds that when one spouse dies, the surviving spouse automatically has the right to remain in the home. That wouldn't have applied to a same-sex couple before Friday's ruling.

"Same-sex marriage at the state level have only been valid for 11 years, so this area of law is still new," he said.

Friday's ruling may be a landmark one, but even so, same-sex couples may face hurdles, Armstrong said. Localities may still challenge some of the provisions.

"There are still things people are going to have to do," Armstrong said. "You still have to carry travel documents -- your marriage certificate, your durable power of attorney, your health-care proxy. Frankly, I would do this even with marriage equality. Couples may still face resistance.

"My husband and I have been together for a number of years and have been together for a number of years before we got married, and then the Supreme Court ruled on [the DOMA case] and it really made a difference for us," said Armstrong. "Many states don't have job discrimination laws and housing protection, but to know we don't have to be thinking about all these workaround strategies and worrying about what state do we move to -- it's hugely important, hugely symbolic."

Granted, it may be tough to conjure up much sympathy for America's most spectacular state. But strip away the fabulous beaches, palm trees, hula dancers and surfers, and Hawaii is just one state trying to compete with 49 others, while facing a host of built-in disadvantages.

It is in the middle of the ocean, more than 2,000 miles away from the mainland and the bulk of U.S. resources. The same factors that make Hawaii an expensive place to live -- think close to $4 for a loaf of bread -- also make it an expensive state to govern, and in which to do business.

And here we come, ranking Hawaii as America's Bottom State for Business for the second time in three years (Hawaii has never finished above 48th in our rankings). Talk about rubbing salt water in the wound!

The last time we ranked Hawaii at the bottom, in 2013, Hawaii Business -- "locally owned, locally committed since 1955" -- shot back with an article extolling the virtues of Hawaii's business climate.

While acknowledging the state's high costs and onerous regulations, the publication declared, "Some companies could be based anywhere in America, but are based here because they say Hawaii is a great place to do business."

The article quoted a number of business owners who said just that, insisting there is no place they would rather be. And who can blame them, with a quality of life that ranks at the top in our study year after year, including this year?

But by the numbers on just about everything else, Hawaii doesn't measure up, and not only for reasons beyond its control.

"Roughly 40 percent of the state's bridges are rated deficient or worse."

Take Hawaii's infrastructure -- the second worst in the nation behind Rhode Island's, according to our study. While it is true that we consider railroads as part of our Infrastructure category and Hawaii doesn't have any, we also look at roads and bridges. The state has plenty of those, and they are in poor shape.

Roughly 40 percent of the state's bridges are rated deficient or worse by the U.S. Department of Transportation. And when it comes to roads, we're not just talking about Maui's famously beautiful Hana Highway, with its hair-raising switchbacks and one-lane bridges. The nonprofit, nonpartisan Reason Foundation rated Hawaii's urban interstate highways the worst maintained in the nation, with congestion second only to Florida.

As for the regulatory climate, which even Hawaii Business conceded is "onerous," the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, in its annual report "Freedom in the 50 States" goes even further, calling Hawaii "interventionist, with strict workers' compensation requirements, mandatory short-term disability insurance, and no right-to-work law."

Or look at the cost of doing business. Again, Hawaii comes in at a disadvantage because of its location, which helps explain why utility bills and office rent are the highest in the nation -- the average electric bill in Hawaii is four times the rate in Arkansas, and office rent is twice as high.

Location also helps explain why taxes are on the high side. But it doesn't explain the complexity of Hawaii's tax code, with at least a dozen different personal income tax rates, according to the state revenue department's website. The Tax Foundation's annual ranking of state business tax climates puts Hawaii's at No. 30, dinging the state for its multiple tax brackets, its 11 percent top marginal income tax rate and its failure to index corporate taxes for inflation.

And when it comes to incentives to help companies reduce their cost of doing business, such as tax breaks and outright state aid, Hawaii is among the stingiest.

Of course, the state does have some built-in incentives beyond its quality of life -- incentives that make Hawaii a unique place in which to do business. Here is one where location works to Hawaii's advantage: Its time zone is roughly midway between the Pacific Rim and the East Coast, making it much easier to be in two places at once.

The state prides itself on being a hub of innovation, ranking 12th in the nation for start-ups this year, according to the Kaufmann Foundation. The report estimates that for every 100,000 adults, 350 become entrepreneurs every month. And it's not out of desperation. Nearly 89 percent of new-business owners last year were employed and left an existing job to strike out on their own, one of the highest rates in the nation. It helps that Hawaii residents seem inherently happy, healthy and motivated. Probably has something to do with that great quality of life.

But will Hawaii ever parlay those advantages into a Top State ranking? Realistically, probably not. There is just too much working against the state. Still, that doesn't mean it can't unleash a little more of its legendary hospitality on business.

It seemed like a classic utopian vision. Free prestigious university classes delivered online, open to anyone, offering the potential to slay the college debt monster.

Instead, so-called Massive Open Online Courses, or MOOCs, proved how little students often learn from online classes. Dropout rates as high as 90 percent were reported, and it seemed that traditional higher ed's stranglehold as the gateway to higher-paying jobs was even tighter.

But new models of higher education alternatives are rising from those ashes that really can challenge -- or neatly supplement -- a college degree. MOOCs have morphed into hybrid programs with a more human touch, and ultrafocused, skills-based training courses in fields like computer programming are proving to be real contenders, offering 90 percent-plus job placement rates.

We're trying to democratize education, make it available to as many people as possible.

The success of programs like General Assembly and The Flatiron School in New York City lead to an inevitable question -- at least if you're technically inclined: Why spend $200,000 on four years of college when you can spend $10,000 on 12 weeks of training and get hired by an app developer for $70,000 or more?

"We're trying to democratize education, make it available to as many people as possible," said Vish Makhijani, chief operating officer of Udacity, which ran some of those celebrated MOOC failures.

Udacity has abandoned the idea of giving classes away to huge numbers of people in favor of "nanodegrees" -- boot-camp style, short-term programs with a laser-like focus on preparing students for a career. Nanodegree subjects include Web developer, Android developer, iOS developer ... you get the picture.

What you don't get is a huge student loan debt. Udacity classes start at $1,200 for a six-month program. The fees have actually helped with online classes' biggest problem: High dropout rates. Turns out, more people stick with classes if they have to pay for them.

"Our form factor, delivery over the Web and mobile, makes it very affordable. And we've decided to do that away from the traditional university system," Makhijani said. The school has also added an Uber-like version of peer reviews, digital age teaching assistants, which lets students grab virtual roving experts and get one-on-one feedback that was sorely missing from initial MOOCs.

When Udacity pivoted toward computer programming courses, it found a cottage industry of "hack schools" were already thriving in the space.

A Better Deal

General Assembly offers intense, in-person training to students in 14 cities. Co-founder Jake Schwartz comes from a private equity investment background, and thinks higher education institutions will have to offer a better deal to students in the future.

"What we think of as college now is a luxury good," Schwartz said. "Think of the value proposition. No. 1 is baby-sitting young adults. It's a safe place for them to learn about themselves and learn to drink beer. No. 2 is the liberal arts idea of becoming a citizen of the world. And then No. 3 is helping you prepare for economic life. ... But I ask, 'What is the value proposition?"

General Assembly's answer to that question: A good job. Tuition isn't cheap. Students pay anywhere from $3,500 for part-time courses to around $10,000 for immersive eight- to 12-week courses, in subjects ranging from Web development to data science to digital marketing. But Schwartz says 99 percent of them get a job within 180 days of completion.

"We focus solely on in-demand, contemporary skills," he said. "We are trying to deliver an outcome."

Avi Flombaum is himself a college dropout who went on to co-found The Flatiron School in New York City, which now charges $15,000 for 12-week immersive courses in subjects like Android app development. He brags about a third-party audit that claims essentially all Flatiron graduates get jobs earning at least $70,000 a year upon completion.

Many are college graduates who need help making the next step in life, he said. But the school does offer an eight-month fellowship program designed to help 18- to 26-year-old New Yorkers without a four-year degree develop the programming skills they need to get hired as Web developers.

"The college problem is about more than debt," Flombaum said. "It's about students being unprepared and undirected about how to enter the workforce. It's a combination of a skills gap and also a general lack of direction. Students aren't sure what they enjoy doing. They are inquisitive and smart but not sure what job going to allow them to work in that way and make a living."

Skills-based schools are aiming to disrupt the lives of teachers, too. Fedora is among the several services that allow anyone with expertise to teach anything online. Fedora takes a cut, but teachers keep most of the tuition they charge. Class prices can range from just a few dollars to several thousands. And while there is the odd successful watercolor course, tech classes are by far the most popular says founder Ankur Nagpal.

'Democratize Teaching'

"We are moving from a credential-based economy to a skills-based economy. It doesn't matter if you are certified. What matters is that you can do the job," he said. "Who is to say someone with a Ph.D. is better at teaching you how to code? We are trying to democratize teaching."

So far, these boot camp training programs haven't strayed far from the obvious, focusing primarily on technologically driven courses like coding apps, managing databases and so on. Students who invest so heavily in a specific skill -- rather than a more general topic area like engineering -- might find their options limited in an industry that changes so quickly. After all, who knows how long Android app coding skills will pay well?

The "hack schools" that dot Silicon Valley promise a shovel during a gold rush, but critics point out that they can't give students the prestige of a brand-name university degree, or the more holistic view of computer science that four years of classes can offer.

Flombaum argues that coding offers life skills too. "We can teach skills that will never go away: How you approach a problem; being able to articulate a thinking process to a computer; how to understand logic. What coders are really good at is thinking about thinking," he said.

In what might seem an irony, Flombaum is among the boot camp tech-class crowd that's skeptical of online course delivery. In-person coaching and camaraderie are both essential elements of learning, this group argues.

'Blended Model'

"Education is not [just] about content. That's like giving someone a textbook," agrees General Assembly's Schwartz. "It's not just about exercises. There's the emotional journey, career coaching, interactions with peers. All these dynamics are incredibly important to learning ... we are going to have more of a blended model, but we are very skeptical that the core of our business will be online."

One big advantage skills schools have over other institutions of higher learning: they can be as nimble as the job market. It can take a decade for a university to develop a new major field of study; Udacity says it can create a brand-new nanodegree within four or five months.

That's particularly important in a world where workers might change careers four or five times in a lifetime. Today's 22-year-old college graduate might raise a family supported by a job in an industry that doesn't even exist yet, and many boot camps think their sweet spot will be in retraining midcareer professionals rather than replacing college. About 40 percent of Udacity's students are 35 or older, the firm says.

"Most of our students have college degrees. We are disrupting graduate school more than colleges," Schwartz said.

Opportunities on the Cheap

But college is clearly in the crosshairs.

"We have numerous testimonials from people who say, 'I came from a four-year degree program ... and then I pay $79 for an online class that gets me more opportunity than my $30,000 degree,' " says Fedora's Nagpal. "Now, jobs are not the only way of quantifying the value of an education, but it's impossible not to think that's going to change a lot of things."

Makhijani, of Udacity, talks about "unbundling" the elements of the university experience -- skills training could come from boot camp courses, while community building and more general courses could be delivered separately. "But that will take time."

One reason for the delay: nanodegrees and bootcamps are so dominated by computer programming offerings that it's unclear the format will work well in other subject areas. While learning to manipulate data is important in every field today ("In reality, every company is a tech company," said Schwartz), you won't soon find many people signing their kids up for a school full of elementary teachers with 10 weeks of training or to be defended by lawyers with nano-law degrees.

Still, Flatiron School's Flombaum believes that education has become too much of an either/or proposition in the minds of most. Online or in person, college or boot camp, liberal arts or STEM.

"Look, there are very few bad guys in education. Nobody said, 'Hey guys, let's hike up tuition and totally screw everybody.' We are not an indictment of higher education," he said. "The problem is when [it seems like] the only option is a college buy-in to a four-year degree and $60,000 in debt. ... That's such a myopic view. And you're front-loading your entire education investment, and I don't think we'll ever live in a world where something we learned 10 years ago will work for us today. The opportunity cost is too high for too many people and we pretend that it's not."

Even as companies chase millennial spending dollars, they recognize that older Americans actually have money. They know baby boomers appreciate a good value.

Here are some of the Top Best Most wonderful discounts for seniors. By the way, can we pick another word? Senior sounds so old. Maybe we should call them Smarter Citizens?

Travel

Most airlines provide discounts to fliers who are at least 65 years old, if you ask for them.

Once you're on the ground, The Senior List has discovered that Hertz (HTZ) and Avis (CAR) provide AARP members discounts of up to 25 percent, and Budget will help your budget with discounts as high at 30 percent.

Marriott (MAR) provides 15 percent discounts for customers who are at least 62, but some Hyatt (H) hotels will boost that discount to as much as 50 percent.

Dunkin' Donuts (DNKN) will give you a free donut with the purchase of a large cup of coffee (at participating stores).

PapaJohn's discounts online pizza orders by 25 percent for people who are at least 55 years old if you type "AARP25" in the promo code.

Groceries and Drugstores

Publix knocks 5 percent off the price of your groceries every Wednesday if you're at least 55, except in Florida.

In the Northeast, Waldbaum's will discount orders of $30 or more by 5 percent for shoppers ages 55 and older, usually on Tuesdays. You need to present a coupon.

For prescriptions, AARP discounts of up to 38 percent are recognized at 64,000 participating pharmacies, so ask.

Chains like Rite Aid (RAD), CVS (CVS), and Walgreens (WBA) have special programs that may cost a small fee to join in exchange for discounts on some prescription and generic meds.

Target (TGT) has a prescriptions savings plan that saves 10 to 50 percent on certain prescriptions at participating stores. You don't even have to be a senior citizen to join! So it's not really just a senior discount, it's just a great discount. The bonus here: Other members of your household can use the card, and you can earn reward points toward in-store discounts after filling five eligible prescriptions.

And for dessert ...

If you are at least 60 years old, The Senior List reports you can get 10 percent off your Ben & Jerry's ice cream. That totally makes turning the big 6-0 worth it.

Rupert Murdoch, the 84-year-old chief executive officer and controlling shareholder of 21st Century Fox (FOXA), is preparing to step down as CEO of the media giant and hand that title to his son James, according to numerous sources close to the Murdoch family.

An announcement is expected in the near term, while it's unclear whether the reorganization would take place this year or at the start of 2016. Rupert Murdoch will continue to be the executive chairman of Fox, while his son Lachlan would also become an executive co-chairman of the company.

As part of the management reordering at Fox, COO Chase Carey will step down and take on a yet undefined role as an advisor at the company. Carey was widely expected to exercise his right to an early release from his contract, allowing him to leave the company at the end of this year. Now, sources tell me, he is likely to remain in some capacity through 2016. He didn't return a call for comment,

While James Murdoch, 42, would take over the day-to-day management of Fox, he will work in tandem with his 43-year-old brother Lachlan and his father. Sources who have spoken with the Murdochs in recent weeks tell me they have shared their plans openly and describe the Murdoch brothers' new roles as a "partnership."

A Fox spokesperson said that the matter of succession is on the board of director's agenda at its next regularly scheduled meeting and declined further comment.

While no one doubts the elder Murdoch will still have the final say on whatever goes on at Fox, Carey's stepping down as COO will leave the company without a layer of senior management outside the family for the first time. For many years that role was filled ably by Peter Chernin, who departed as News Corp.'s COO in 2009 and was succeeded by Carey, who is widely lauded by shareholders for his management of the company's cable networks.

James Murdoch, who gave up his job running BSkyB after the U.K. hacking scandal engulfed the company four years ago, has been winning fans among the Fox investor base for his work as co-COO. They tell me they believe James has matured as a leader, has a detailed knowledge of the company's operations and is the driving force behind its expansion in digital distribution. As one source who knows both James and Lachlan well described it, "James will have the primary role in running Fox while Lachlan will take on a broader strategic role from his co-chairman position."

Rupert Murdoch, who through the Murdoch Family Trust controls 39.4 percent of the voting shares at Fox, isn't expected to change much of what he does day to day as chairman of both Fox and News Corp. (NWS), but the change at Fox is clearly an acknowledgement that the next generation of Murdochs is ready to take its place in leading the media giant.

That's because moves like the one seen since June 2014 -- down an average of 84 cents a gallon -- often don't have a huge impact, particularly if they're driven by supply surges rather than demand drops.

A research paper this week (with multiple charts) from the New York branch of the Federal Reserveclarifies the effects: Using a slew of variables and looking from 1986 through the first quarter of 2015, the conclusion was basically that in instances of oversupply, gross domestic product and consumption over the longer run increase "quite modestly" while nonresidential investment i.e., capital expenditures for business shows somewhat stronger growth.

Americans are certainly driving more, and in newer cars. We just might not have any particular place to go.

For Wall Street economists, the findings could be something of a jolt. Over the past three quarters and then some, they've been projecting that big savings at the pump would propel consumers to become increasingly confident and spend more.

Reality, though, hasn't meshed. Consumer spending has been tepid and GDP growth has been abysmal -- a decline of 0.7 percent in the first quarter, a gain of just 2.2 percent in the fourth quarter of 2014, and second-quarter growth tracking at just 1.1 percent, according to the Atlanta Fed.

That's occurred as gas prices at the pump plunged from an average of $3.70 a gallon a year ago to $2.86 a gallon this month, with a low of $2.15 a gallon back in February, according to the Energy Information Administration.

Researchers at New York brokerage Convergex believe they know where Americans spent their savings at the pump -- on more gas. Looking at one period, Convergex found that Americans drove 3.9 percent more in March 2015 than in March 2014.

"Americans are certainly driving more, and in newer cars," Nick Colas, the firm's chief market strategist, said in a note. "We just might not have any particular place to go."

As for a future economic bump from lower gas prices, New York Fed researchers Jan Groen and Patrick Russo said the biggest impact is probably in the rearview mirror.

"Our analysis suggests that the expansionary oil supply shock of late 2014 and early 2015 will have a relatively modest stimulative impact on economic activity," they wrote. "Which will peak around mid-2015, and the effects should dissipate significantly by early 2016."

When it comes to the manufacturing sector in the U.S., it's not quite "Happy Days Are Here Again," as some have been singing for the past few years. Once you look closely at the data, it's more like "Those Were the Days."

That's because since the Great Recession, manufacturing is down 3.2 percent, according to an eye-opening report by the nonpartisan Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. It notes there are now 15,000 fewer production facilities in the U.S. than in 2007 -- and 2 million fewer jobs.

A look at the numbers suggests that the rallying cry about a manufacturing renaissance has been wishful thinking among many industry trade groups and economists. Even favorable shifts in a host of factors, including labor costs, the shale gas boom, transportation costs and the weak U.S. dollar, hasn't revitalized the sector to its post glory days.

We're seeing stable and slow recovery in demand ... but that doesn't necessarily mean that growth will continue or that we're in a state of renaissance.

According to the National Association of Manufacturers, the industry trade group, federal policies on taxes, energy, regulations and competitiveness are what's holding back further growth. Right now the sector accounts for 12 percent of GDP and supports an estimated 17.6 million jobs.

"We're concerned about the overall decline of the manufacturing industry since around the turn of the century," said Adams Nager, an economic research analyst at ITIF and co-author with Robert Atkinson of "The Myth of America's Manufacturing Renaissance: The Real State of U.S. Manufacturing."

Much of the renaissance hype is tied to growth over the last four to five years since the Great Recession, which can be misleading, he added, because the trough was so deep. "We're seeing stable and slow recovery in demand, and that explains the growth in manufacturing, but that doesn't necessarily mean that growth will continue or that we're in a state of renaissance," Nager said.

The best measure of the health of manufacturing is real value added, Nager said. Since 2013, the most recent year data is available, that number was down 3.2 percent from 2007 levels -- just prior to the recession -- despite 5.6 percent GDP growth, he noted. "If you take out computers," a particularly strong sector, "we shrank 7.7 percent." What's more, the report said, there are still 2 million fewer jobs and 15,000 fewer manufacturing establishments than there were in 2007.

In February 2012, PricewaterhouseCoopers released a study entitled, "Shale Gas: A Renaissance in U.S. Manufacturing?" It was among similar widely touted analyses of how the ongoing boom in natural gas -- largely prompted by hydraulic fracturing, or fracking -- was one of several key components that might lead to a surge in U.S. manufacturing and employment. Others were the low rate of the dollar, the high price of oil (then around $100 a barrel) and rising labor costs in China.

During the intervening three years, however, those trends haven't exactly panned out, as the ITIF's myth-busting report laid out:

On Chinese labor: Chinese wages, while rising rapidly, are still estimated to be just 12 percent of average U.S. wages in 2015.

On high global shipping costs: They're back to normal after falling by 93 percent in a six-month period in 2009.

On the shale gas boom: That low-cost alternative to oil and coal has had a minor impact only on energy-intensive industries, such as petrochemicals and drilling operations.

On currency valuation fixing the trade deficit: The dollar has risen sharply, yet our trade deficit persists. "We've consistently run a deficit since 1975, and we're no closer to seeing exports get anywhere near our imports," Nager said. "The idea that we can just wait it out is pretty dangerous."

On U.S. productivity restoring jobs: Productivity isn't increasing faster than that of other industrialized countries, and it is growing much slower than China and South Korea.

"There certainly have been some headwinds in the last few years, but the fundamentals are still in place," said Bob McCutcheon, PwC's Industrial Products leader. For instance, the strength of the dollar bares both good and bad news. It's a sign of continuing economic growth in the U.S., despite the lingering trade deficit, McCutcheon offered. Likewise, the precipitous decline in oil prices "is a direct reflection of what's been going on in shale gas. It's the global response to our strengthening position in the energy sector."

The resurgence in U.S. manufacturing is in fact a long-term prospect, McCutcheon clarified, and regardless of headwinds, certain sub-sectors, like energy, are doing better than others. Heavy-equipment, metals and chemicals, which benefit from being less labor-intensive, and lower energy costs, are relatively robust. He also points to advanced, disruptive technology -- robotics, 3-D printing, the Internet of Things -- as American strengths.

"The global economy is evolving, and the U.S. is right in the epicenter of it all," opined Dave Blanchard, a senior editor at IndustryWeek, in sizing up America's current manufacturing stature. He addressed the ballyhooed promise of reshoring or near-shoring of jobs back to the U.S. from foreign sites. Reports of Apple (AAPL), GE (GE), Caterpillar (CAT) and other major players reshoring some operations are feel-good anecdotes, he said.

And manufacturers could reduce supply-chain costs, like logistics, transportation and warehousing, by setting up shop in close-by, low-wage countries such as Mexico. But that's not going to make a dent in the nearly 5 million U.S. manufacturing jobs lost since 2000, he said.

The National Skills Shortage

Blanchard said that "the state of U.S. manufacturing in 2015 is relatively robust compared to where it had been over the previous decade," referring to the rebounded auto industry and the energy sector, and that increased use of robotics and other next-generation manufacturing technologies hold promise. In that latter vein, he joins a rising chorus of observers who insist that although the U.S. remains the world leader in R&D, training workers to use the technology is one of the greatest challenges for manufacturers.

Sridhar Kota is a professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Michigan and a board member of the coincidentally named Manufacturing Renaissance, a Chicago-based nonprofit champion of advanced manufacturing. He also served from 2009-12 in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, where he helped establish the Advanced Manufacturing Partnership and its signature Manufacturing Innovation Institutes.

"We need a plan for what to do with good ideas and how to mature them," he said, "to create the infrastructure, knowledge and skills so that ideas turn into products and the manufacturing sticks here, rather than invent it here and make it 'over there.'"

He bemoaned the fact that R&D in the U.S. was responsible for the technology behind solar cells, lithium-ion batteries and flat-panel TVs, though we ceded production of those lucrative markets to overseas manufacturers.

Getting Back Our Mojo

"Those ships have sailed, and they're not coming back," he said. But what about next-generation technologies we're working on now, such as flexible electronics, nanocellulose and self-driving cars? "We can't let Asia pick them up," he said, advocating for more public-private R&D partnerships. "When new technology is emerging, you want R&D and manufacturing to be co-located."

Kota agrees with NAM and other manufacturing boosters that to spur existing industries, the U.S. needs to make them more competitive through reforms of the tax code, free trade and regulations. Echoing that sentiment is Deborah Wince-Smith, president and CEO of the Council on Competitiveness in Washington, D.C. The non-partisan council supports manufacturing competitiveness through innovation, but is critical of what Wince-Smith said is "our very innovation-hostile capital cost structure and regulatory environment in the U.S. that's impeding many of these things," especially advanced manufacturing.

She, too, calls for new models of public-private partnerships to foster R&D. Toward that effort, this week the council will announce a new initiative, Exploring Innovation Frontiers, a 10-year program integrating energy and manufacturing productivity.

"We continue to be an innovation game-changer in many areas," Wince-Smith said, "but it can't just be in software and communications. We still have to make things, because we live in a physical world."

The number of delinquent mortgages continues to fall, but the foreclosure crisis is still taking its toll on hundreds of thousands of borrowers.

Of the approximately 952,000 borrowers who are 90 or more days past due on their monthly payments, but not yet in foreclosure, 62 percent have already been through some form of home retention program, according to Black Knight Financial Services. They are, it seems, beyond help. Home retention programs were established by lenders and the government to work with borrowers to enable them to keep their homes.

"The percentages do look significant," said Ben Graboske, senior vice president of Black Knight's data and analytics unit. He pointed to trends in the government's modification program, which has given borrowers less relief of late.

In 2010, homeowners on average could have received a $530 monthly payment reduction. That has dropped to the $450 range today. Graboske said that it is a major reason you are not seeing better performance for these homeowners today.

Banks are also getting more aggressive in pushing delinquent loans through the foreclosure process, rather than offering more modifications. As home prices rise and demand surges, banks can sell the homes more easily in today's market than they could during the height of the crisis. Retention actions are down 42 percent over past two years, but of the new modifications or payment plans, 70 percent have already been through one or even more modifications that failed, according to BKFS.

Banks are also favoring short sales more, rather than taking the home to final foreclosure and selling it. A short sale is when the bank allows the home to be sold for less than the value of the mortgage.

"The ongoing shift away from [final foreclosure] sales is a driver of improving home prices since bank-owned properties typically sell at a larger discount than short sales," noted a new report from CoreLogic (CLGX). Distressed homes accounted for 12 percent of March home sales, according to the report, down from 39 percent at the peak of the foreclosure crisis.

The numbers still vary dramatically place to place. Ironically, Washington, D.C., where the federal loan modification program was born, led the nation with 67 percent of its seriously delinquent inventory having gone through some sort of home retention activity. Maryland, Georgia, Texas and Connecticut followed with each seeing 66 percent of their 90-plus-day delinquent inventory involved in a home retention action.

The government's Home Affordable Modification Program, introduced in 2009 and recently extended, has offered just more than 1.8 million loan modifications to date. Banks and mortgage servicers have also done independent loan modifications, including millions of dollars in principal reduction and principal forgiveness.

Although the number of both delinquent loans and those in active foreclosure is down dramatically, they are still two and three times their precrisis norms, respectively, with 28 percent of the remaining foreclosure inventory located in just three states: Florida, New York and New Jersey, according to BKFS.

There hasn't been a significant increase in wages, people have student loans and other debt, and many are continuing to struggle financially.

"There hasn't been a significant increase in wages, people have student loans and other debt, and many are continuing to struggle financially," said Charles Jeszeck, the GAO's director of education, workforce and income security, which analyzed the Federal Reserve's 2013 Survey of Consumer Finances to come up with its estimates. "We aren't surprised that people have not saved a lot for retirement."

Even among those who do have retirement savings, their nest eggs are small. The agency found the median amount of those savings is about $104,000 for households with members between 55 and 64 years old and $148,000 for households with members 65 to 74 years old. That's equivalent to an inflation-protected annuity of $310 and $649 a month, respectively, according to the GAO.

"I don't care what anyone says. That's not enough income for retirement," said Anthony Webb, senior research economist at the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, who reviewed the GAO report.

Social Security remains a fundamental part of most Americans' retirement plans, with benefits providing most of the income for about half of households age 65 and older, according to the GAO.

The agency studied the level of Americans' retirement savings at the request of Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent who is seeking the Democratic nomination in the 2016 presidential election and is also the ranking Democratic member on the Senate's subcommittee on primary health and retirement security.

Estimates about the size and scope of the retirement savings problem vary widely, the GAO found. In addition to examining the Survey of Consumer Finances, it reviewed nine studies conducted between 2006 and 2015 by a variety of organizations, including academics, benefits consultant Aon Hewitt, the Employee Benefit Research Institute and the Investment Company Institute. Based on these reports, it concluded that one-third to two-thirds of workers are at risk of falling short of their retirement savings targets, in part because of the range of assumptions about how much income is required in retirement.

The research that the GAO examined consistently showed that people aged 55 to 64 are less confident about their retirement and plan to work longer to afford retirement. However, a 2012 study by EBRI found that about half of retirees said they retired earlier than planned because of health problems, changes at their workplace or having to care for a spouse or another family member. This suggests "that many workers may be overestimating their future retirement income and savings," wrote GAO researchers.

"EBRI's model does show that a significant percentage of households will run short of money in retirement," said Jack VanDerhei, EBRI's research director. "This is because we model all the major risks in retirement."

Reports like those and the GAO analysis should serve as a wake-up call about the lack of Americans' retirement savings, said Catherine Collinson, president of the Transamerica Center for Retirement Studies.

Transamerica's retirement research, which wasn't included in the GAO's review, doesn't give board projections about America's retirement readiness because retirement is "a very personal question," she said. But Collinson stressed the need for more people to calculate their projected retirement needs and to plan ahead accordingly. "As a society, we cannot do enough to raise awareness about the magnitude of this problem."